[lit-ideas] Re: Ought we to do something about Iran?
- From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 19:09:14 -0600
LH:
So should we do something about Iran? And if the answer is "yes," what should
we do?
I guess it depends on whether or not you believe that if you have the power to
do something, then you have the right. I don't believe that. So I don't see
what we can do legally or morally but to submit the question to the UN and hope
we can persuade the member nations that our position is in their best intestest
as well. But the Bush Administration has made that extremely difficult with
their arrogant dismissal of the UN by their invasion of Iraq.
The proliferation of nuclear weapons is a given, as I see it. As long as the
notion of nationhood and sovereignty are with us then every nation is under a
moral edict to develop nuclear weapons for their own security. North Korea has
proven to all the non-nuclear nations that they will only ever be safe if they
develop the bomb and the ability to deliver it. It's going to happen in the
coming decades. Every nation will have the bomb. Unless, that is, the world
of nations comes to realize that this is madness and might well lead to the
annihilation of the human race. Unless the world of nations comes to realize
that the notion of national sovereignty is just an idea whose time has passed
and that it is time to get on with the sovereignty of the human nation. I can
hear several people snickering now. But they snickered at the idea of
democracy too. However, it would require vision and courage by our leaders and
I don't have a lot of hope.
Should we do something about Iran? Yes. Embrace them, entangle them in our
Western web of neuroses. Make the bastards wealthy, give them something to
loose.
Mike Geary
Memphis
----- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence Helm
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 4:48 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Ought we to do something about Iran?
The United States developed, built and used atomic weapons at the end of
World War II. For reasons no longer clear to me, Leftists in our scientific
community decided the world would be safer if the Soviet Union also had these
weapons and so sent them the information on how to build them. I don't recall
who got them next. Presumably we told Britain how to build them. Perhaps the
French built theirs on their own. I suspect the Israelis did. I believe the
Indians and Pakistanis did as well.
I don't know whether the North Koreans built their own or were helped by the
Chinese. If the latter, that could explain why the Chinese are dragging their
feet in doing something about the North Koreans. I notice that South Korea has
informed the U.S. that it is opposed to "regime change" in North Korea. But
then we expected that. Eventually the North and South will be put back
together again and the South would be delighted if the North brought them
nuclear power.
The Russians and French were helping Iraq build nuclear weapons at one time,
but the Israelis bombed their factory and Saddam never managed to build them.
Iran according to Ilan Berman, Tehran Rising, 2005, is being helped in this
regard by Russia, China and France. These three nations obviously have no
problem with Iran becoming a nuclear power; so should we? Berman and others
I've read on this subject would answer in the affirmative. Berman cites case
after case of Iranian terrorist activity, much of it against the U.S., and it
is much better financed than Al Quaeda. Iran has also, according to Berman,
been sharing their nuclear knowledge with Syria, Saudi Arabia, and one or two
other nations. Also, the Iranian government, the people in power, seems not
to have backed off from Khomeini's announced war against the U.S.
In Bush's State of the Union, he seemed to be content to let the EU and UN
continue to try to deal with Iran, but does anyone think that will really work?
Lawrence
Other related posts:
